Concept Paper C

Concept: Definition of Roles and Responsibilities

ICANN

• Non-profit organisation that coordinates the development of Consensus Policies that are mutually agreed and conformed to by Supporting Organisations under the advice of Advisory Committees - that taken together shall be known as the ICANN process.
• ICANN has enforceable written contracts with Supporting Organisations or Constituents.
• ICANN has informal social contracts with Advisory Committees.
• Both forms of contracts equally important.

ICANN Process

• Stable and sustainable quality control policy process to ensure that practical Concensus Policy is produced and implemented
• Documents known diverse views and makes explicit pro- con arguments or quantified tradeoffs.
• Diversity of well-considered views and vigorous review are primary strengths of ICANN process.
• ICANN is the best place to develop Consensus Policy because of the quality of thought and discourse by knowledgeable participants.

Written Contract

Voluntarily complied written agreement between ICANN and a Supporting Organisation or Constituent of a Supporting Organisation.

Important to keep parties working together to solve issues as they arise instead of simply walking away or stalling.

Social Contract

Unenforceable, mutally understood agreements between ICANN and an Advisory Committee to provide and listen to well meaning advice which, if not duly and seriously considered, would materially affect the trust and credibility of the ICANN process.

Consensus Policy

• Those Proposed Consensus Policies that have been adopted by the ICANN Board of Directors.
• Complaints with respect to an ICANN decision on Consensus Policies can be handled internally within ICANN or, if really necessary, brought before the Independent Review Panel
• Consensus Policies are conformed to and deployed by Supporting Organisations through the enforcement of contracts and agreements or acts of community pressure/market forces.

Proposed Consensus Policy

Written policies that

• relate to the management of the Domain Name System, IP Addresses and Protocol Identifiers
• must have network-wide impact,
• have been developed through an open, transparent, publicly documented and accessible process
• are proposed to the Supra-SO General Assembly for circulation among SOs and ACs

Supporting Organisations (SO)

• Entity that desires to have a documented written agreement with ICANN
• Voluntarily or Contractually Abides by/implements ICANN Consensus Policies
• Votes for ICANN Board of Directors
• Funds ICANN and the ICANN Process
• Does not nominate ICANN Board of Directors

ICANN Director

• An At Large Individual that has taken the ICANN Quiz and has been successfully voted in by the Supporting Organisations.
• In addition to their own unique skill set, ICANN Directors are knowledgeable on ICANN issues, as demonstrated by their public score on the ICANN Quiz.
• They act in an individual capacity, in the best interests of ICANN and the global Internet.
• They are responsible for voting on Proposed Consensus Policies to either
• Accept them as Consensus Policies or
• Reject them with comment and rationale.
• ICANN Directors Candidates are nominated by the At Large Individuals but voted to the Board of Directors by the Supporting Organisations.
• All nominated candidates of the At Large Individuals must demonstrate their ICANN knowledge by taking the ICANN Quiz - the scores of which are public.

ICANN Board Seat

ICANN 19 member Board viewed collectively as a single instatiation of skills sets that are recognised by the SOs and the At Large Individuals as being needed to evolve ICANN and allow it to adequately address proposed Consensus Policies.

Each Board Seat viewed as an opportunity to add specific skill sets to the Board as a whole.

ICANN Quiz

• Coordinated by the At Large Individual Supporting Organisations, the multiple choice quiz is designed to test the general knowledge of ICANN and areas specific to each Supporting Organisation.
• All necessary material to prepare for the quiz is provided by each Supporting Organisation.
• It is objectively designed to reveal which candidates possess the greatest breadth and depth of ICANN related knowledge, in order to effectively perform as an ICANN director, so that SO's may make informed voting decisions.

Supra-SO General Assembly

• Comprised of one representative from each of the Supporting Organisations and Advisory Committees
• Non-blocking
• Circulates Proposed Consensus Policies for consideration and comment to Supporting Organisations and interested Advisory Committees.
• Comments are documented, summarised and annexed to the Proposed SO Policy by the General Assembly Secretariat/ICANN staff
• Proposed Consensus Policy may be retracted/modified by the submitting party or forwarded to the ICANN Board of Directors as a Proposed Consensus Policy for adoption by the ICANN Board of Directors as a Consensus Policy

Advisory Committee (AC)

• Provides valuable advice and a specific perspective to the ICANN Board of Directors on Proposed Consensus Policies
• Groups of entities or At Large Individuals that take an interest in ICANN activities
• Have the ability to self-organise and self-fund
• Share a particular point-of-view with respect to network-wide policies
• Disciplined and organised enough to provide written advice to the ICANN Board of Directors on Proposed Consensus Policies
• An Advisory Committee may wish to enter a formal written agreement with ICANN to become a Supporting Organisation (e.g. RSSAC, cctlds).
• If there are too many AC's/ or the GA becomes unwieldy then the ICANN structure has probably served its purpose and something should probably spin-off/out of ICANN to better accommodate whatever 'public interest' there is at the time - leaving ICANN to minimally continue performing the essential IANA function

At Large Individuals

• The pool of talented individuals that take an interest and participate in ICANN Activities
• They are subscribed to one or more ICANN-related mailing list
• That have a verifiable postal address
• Voluntarily provide financial support to the At Large Individual Supporting Organisation.
• They are willing to commit the time and effort necessary to serve on the ICANN Board of Directors or on the Independent Review Panel.
• They are encouraged to self-organise to form an Advisory Committee or constituency within the At Large Individual Supporting Organisation.
• Responsible for finding and nominating outstanding individuals to serve on the ICANN Board of Directors
• Nominates candidates from the At Large Individuals to serve on the ICANN Board of Directors
• Does not vote for ICANN Board of Directors.
• Activities coordinated/encouraged by an At Large Individual Supporting Organisation

Independent Review Panel

• Comprised of individuals chosen at random from the At Large Individuals and added to the existing proposed composition of independent legal professionals/experts.
• Individuals obliged to serve as long as it takes to come to some decision.
• Fulfills ICANN Geographic Diversity Requirement (minimally 3 At Large Individuals from each of the 5 regions).

At Large Individual Supporting Organisation

• A Supporting Organisation
• Contractually provides resources to enhance the accessibility of ICANN to the wider Internet Community e.g. the timely and regular documentation, summary, translation, explanation of ICANN and SO background materials, discussions and debate.
• Perform outreach activities to encourage individuals to engage in ICANN activities if so desired.
• Assist to provide potential consensus policy risk assessment and impact analysis.
• Assisted by self-funded organisations.
• Prepares an objective, multiple choice ICANN Quiz related to each Supporting Organisation's subject area
• Coordinates the background material to study for the ICANN Quiz.
• Coordinates interviews/debate and information relating to each ICANN Director Candidate.
• Encourage At Large individuals to self-organise around specific network-wide issues.

SO Voting Process

• Supporting Organisations deliberate and publicly vote
• Small, manageable and scaleable voting process.
• Focus on early capture detection rather than perfect prevention.
• For each available seat on the board of directors, each SO provides a ranking on each of the candidates
• Each SO use existing selection system to determine rank of candidates.
• For each seat, use the preferrential voting system to decide winning candidate.